Astralinre

Unless such concepts are not banal, but profound, and that omnipotent being is the source of all love. Actually, I would argue that without love, there is no hate, but that love can exist without hate. I fail to understand why loving everything makes love any less valuable. I don't see any reason why loving everything makes love less "special." How does this happen? I'd also like to point out that in Christianity, God does not love everything, but everyone.

This is really pathetic of me, but is this a joke, or was there an episode of Star Trek about that? If so, which series was it in? [/Trekkie] It was the first episode of Star Trek (3rd produced, 1st to star Kirk, and 7th to air.). It is entitled "Where No Man Has Gone Before." Produced by the dream team of Gene Roddenberry, Gene L. Coon, and Dorothy Fontana. I'll have to find that and watch it sometime. :P

This is really pathetic of me, but is this a joke, or was there an episode of Star Trek about that? If so, which series was it in? [/Trekkie]

It's ok, most Christian leaders hate him, too. Anti-semitics have no place declaring their words the laws of God. I agree. On top of that, I don't believe an honest Christian can be an anti-Semite, considering that Christ, all of the Apostles, most of the early church, and all of the Prophets were all Jews, and that Christianity considers itself the fulfillment of Judaism. There's a natural inconsitancy between Christianity and anti-Semitism.

But why is it a mistake? Why is it that having to work a low-paying job would screw up the drop-out's life?

I agree with you. Hunting/fishing is fine, so long as the animals are used. As a Christian, I believe that part of man's job in ruling the earth is to make the best possible use of nature, while at the same time conserving it and caring for it. Hunting/fishing, so long as it is done for food, and so long as it is done in moderation, is perfectly fine.

Because he's not doing the best job he can. Working at a casino won't screw up his life, but he'll be doing very poorly - and definately not what he's capable of. Go back to school man. My father never went to college, and he still pulls half a million a year. What am I going to do? I'm going to stay in college as long as possible, and get my Doctorate. Obvious, yeah? Sweeping generalizations are bad. That was a different time. And still, at least he graduated high school. You can still get good jobs without going to college, but it will give you a disadvantage when trying to apply to jobs, because others with college degrees will be the ones picked first. Of course people with less education are going to have harder time getting high-paying jobs. That's obvious. My question is this: Does a man screw up his life by choosing that lack of education and its results? Why?

Good job in completely screwing up your life. You will be stuck with blue-collar jobs your whole life, and with the rate of unemployment, especially in blue-collar jobs, your future likely could be screwed. Plus. as an adult, going back to get your HS and college degree is extremely difficult. I feel bad for any family you may have in the future. Viktor, what makes you think that having a blue collar job will screw up his life?

I'm of the belief that dreams usually reflect the subconscious. However, most people fail to realize this because dreams appear so absurd, because oftentimes, they are the result of unbridled imagination. I've kept dream journals before, and I've been able to look back and see how my dream topics corresponded to what I was feeling, thinking about, or surrounded by at the time. Dreams can offer very keen insight into yourself.

When running a marathon while wearing next to nothing.

Nevermind that Victoria sure doesn't have many secrets anymore.

Glad to see somebody agrees. 8-) Shame they're not available in supermarkets yet though. You mean they aren't available in your supermarket? Your town is really behind the times.

"Technology, is there a point which it is bad for a society?" I would say so. A wise man once said, "When you create a machine to do the work of a man, you take something away from the man." I believe that if technology is taking over man's role, it is rarely good for society. However, technology that expands man potential is usually good for society. For example, if a man always relies on a calculator, his ability to calculate math on his own will diminish. However, a crane expands man potential - it allows him to move more weight than he would be able to on his own. Most technology can be used in a beneficial way, but much technology can be used in a harmful way.

I ment fly around the WORLD and cross it withing a day. Then...you'd be back where you started, albeit you arrived there at an astronomical rate. If he could fly around the world in around an hour, he would in fact be a time traveler. In the time it would take him to fly around the world, he would, in fact, travel almost an hour foward in time. Granted, this is no faster than he would have traveled in time otherwise.

Humans are finite. We don't know everything, so sometimes we lack sufficient knowledge to decide whether or not something is true. You're correct in this. However, proving something to be untrue is different than lacking knowledge. If we know enough to prove that a statement is not true, then it is false - there is no other option. If we do NOT know enough to prove a statement true or false, then it is potentially true or false - we don't know enough to decide. Do you see the difference? I'm not sure how well I'm explaining this. I somewhat understand. Darn, I have to go read some [bleep]ens....he is so incredibly boring. Hehe, that makes me glad that I only have to read a chapter about the American Civil War in my history book. I'll take that over [bleep]ens any day. :P

Humans are finite. We don't know everything, so sometimes we lack sufficient knowledge to decide whether or not something is true. You're correct in this. However, proving something to be untrue is different than lacking knowledge. If we know enough to prove that a statement is not true, then it is false - there is no other option. If we do NOT know enough to prove a statement true or false, then it is potentially true or false - we don't know enough to decide. Do you see the difference? I'm not sure how well I'm explaining this.

That's something very important. Some mods manage it, many don't. It's also something very difficult. A mod involved in a heated debate may be tempted to abuse his power. While I agree mods needs to be involved in discussions just like regular users, we need to choose people who can do so without it getting in the way of their job. That is true. Insane was quite good at that actually. He was. That's one of the things I've always liked about him. He was fair, but still participated in the forum.

Certainly there are situations where there are more than two options. If that were the case, my reasoning would be faulty. However, in the case of truth, there are only two options. Truth is saying what is. If I what I say matches reality, it is true. If what I say does not match reality, it is false. Where is the third option? Either a statement matches reality or it doesn't.

That's something very important. Some mods manage it, many don't. It's also something very difficult. A mod involved in a heated debate may be tempted to abuse his power. While I agree mods needs to be involved in discussions just like regular users, we need to choose people who can do so without it getting in the way of their job.

You're not Number 1 Herr; Anesthesia is. :P

In other words, "I can't defend my viewpoint at all, so I'm going to find an excuse to get out of here." Is this a true assessment of your motives? What? Its 23.38, im tired, i have college in the morning, i have an interview at Oxford Uni this week. Ive said what ive got to say, im no philospher or great arguer. I have my views, you think theyre wrong. End of story. Why do you suddenly think, "oh he cant come back with another argument, I WIN!!", thats not what a discussion is about. I didn't say I win. In fact, I haven't succeeded at all, I don't think. My goal is not to beat you or to humiliate you, but to make you question your beliefs and see that they do not stand up to logic. If you can't question your own beliefs the way you've been questioning other peoples', then you haven't learned anything from this discussion. All you've done is dodge questions and avoid logic. I haven't won at all, because you don't seem to be any closer to any form of truth than you were at the beginning. That is what a discussion is about, not winning, but getting closer to truth. (And remember, you were in the one who came in here criticizing and insulting others' beliefs. If you can't take it yourself, and if you can't handle people testing your beliefs, then you ought not to post on these threads.)

In other words, "I can't defend my viewpoint at all, so I'm going to find an excuse to get out of here." Is this a true assessment of your motives?

Personally, I think it should be smaller. Perhaps size 1 font? At least give the guy a size 2 font; he's earned it. Kayla, feel free to put his name right below my soon to be size 30 name. ;) That way I could like...share in the awesomeness that is Astra? w00t! Yeah, you know, bask in my glow, ride my coat tails, cook my dinners, that sort of thing.

You didn't just say truth is unobtainable, but that it doesn't exist. In such a case, all striving for truth, including science, is absurd. Say I am in a room, and I see a spider. Do I have to have knowledge of the entire room to claim that there is a spider in it? Or do I only have to know the part in which the spider is? My grandfather told my father that he was born in Alabama, and my father told me. Since my grandfather didn't tell it directly to me, it can't be true. That's your reasoning; see any problems with it? Imagine a game of darts. I throw a dart at the board. But wait, there isn't a board. There's not a dart board in the entire room. How is it possible for my dart to hit close to the bullseye if there is no dart board?

We do happen to keep track of those. There's more to the forum than meets the eye. I'm not quite sure what you're saying... could you explain it a little better? :P Perhaps they split such posts off to a hidden forum, which only the mods can see. Each user has his own thread of immature posts, which the mods and admins use to pass judgement on that person. Once one of those threads reaches a certain number of posts, the user is dealt with. Watch out for Alduron, the assassin in the night.